SB 








IS 

b 2 

< s 

g o 



k^ 


■- 7* 


^^ 


t^ 


ffi 


^ 


- Cq 






._^ < a. 



£ X. 
S < 

K 

a 

w 

2 



1 



|)i:SI(iNS FOl! Till- (i ATI- WAYS 



SOUTHERN ENTRANCES 



THE CENTEAL PiVKK, 



lllCILARD M. HU^T, 

MEMHEll OF THE A M E R IC AN I N ST I T U TE O K ARCHITECTS. 



A DKSCJMrTlON OF THE DE SKINS, 



LMTTEI! IN IIELATKlN TU Til KM. 



ADDRESSED TO THE 



CO MM ISSri^XKRS OF THE PARK 



X E \V Y ( I \l K : 
D. VAX NOSTK'AXl), 1 !» 2 BROADWAY, 

1866. 



h 



% 



% 



y' ^^ 



>^^ 



Kntci'fil ;ic('<n<Un2 tc :u-t of Corigross. in tlic ycni- l^fili. 

l!v I>. VAN NOSTItAN'I). 

Ill \\\i- CKrk's (ittici- of tlu' I)i>tiii-i C'.iiii-t of Hit- riiiu-il St:itf> fur llic 
SoiitliiTii Distriit iif N\\\ York. 



A I. V (> i: i>. 1- 1: 1 NT V. i:. 



I. ELEVATIONS AND PLANS OF THE GATEWAYS FOE THE 
ENTEANCES TO THE CENTEAL PAEK ON FIFTY-NINTH 
STEEET. 



11. A DESCEIPTION OF THESE .DESIGNS, IN A LETTEE TO THE 
" EVENING POST," PL^BLISHED JULY 21. 1865. 



III. A LETTEE TO THE COMMLSSIONEES OF THE CENTEAL PAEK, 
BY "CIVIS,'- PUBLISHED IN THE ''EVENING POST," MAECH 
29 AND APEIL 5, 1866. 



IV. EXTEACTS FEOM THE MINUTES OF THE BOAED OF COMMIS- 
SIONEES OF THE CENTEAL PAEK. 



o 
« 




onuoAy ^j, t; 



S 



^1 


3; 




X 


DC 


s: 


X 

u 


■^ 


< 


• 


e 


< ^ 


OL. 


<^ 


< 


^ 5 








^ ^ >*- 


^1- 


i^ 


^ 


e > $ 


< 




9 


C: u 


Dc: 


5 


X 


c :; 


H^' 


w 


s 


5 ; 


z. 


^ 




"^ 5-. 


tiJt 


■V 


e 


s > 


u 






^ = 





'' <f 

















^ -j: 




al — 




2: ^ 




^§ 




^ U 




^ ;i. 








2 -' 




Jm q 




r" Q: 




^ <r 


'•<^ 


-- d 


--.-- 


a 23 




z 


< 


< :j 




~ ^ 




^ >< 




e 




> 


. — . 


< 2 


< 


— r* 


21 


r a. 

5 



'- "3 



2 t- 









f- 


S 


<■ 


u 




^ 


Z 

< 


2 


f- 


ri 


:z 


,r 








2 












OJ 




< 






O 

o 



^ 



> > " ^ -S :§ !^ f? 








4 









< 

ME. 
S- 

Ml 



5C 

CD u 

o t- 






()'.'■ A^-_ 



W.W. 




< 



I < 

L 



5 i 



o 






z 

w 

la 

I 

a 

a: 




0^ 






a: 






< 



o 
ct 

< 



III! 

s ^ > -- 






5 5^^ 



Si ^^lyT 








I 



m . ^. "* 



.' 1 



H 1 




< >i «c 

-J cc s 

< 5 = 



u r- 



r- 
[5; 



V_ 



0= 



:>miMy,iiS 



r 




J" ■ 



xV" 



\ 





z 

W 
U 



6 

a 



S a 






2 

p 

[I. 



o 



J 


g 


s 


-=1^ 






w 


K 


t1 


0, 


H 


W 


§ 


^ 


& 


W 


r-1 


^ 


o 







< 

X 

o 

Q 
W 



IT. 
A DESCRIPTION OF MR. HUNT'S DESIGNS, 

IN A LETTER TO THE '■EVENING POST," PfBLISHED JULY 21, 1865. 



THE CENTRAL PARK.— THE PROPOSED NEW ENTRANCE GATES. 

2h the Editor of tlte " Evening Post .-" 

Among the sketches in the exhibition of the National Academy of Design, 
for 1865, were a series of designs for entrances to the Central Park, by 
Richard M. Ilnnt, one of the leading ai'chitects of New York. These de- 
signs attracted much less attention than they would have done, had it been 
generally understood that they were cojjies of those actually adopted by the 
Commissioners of the Park, and not fanciful sketches merely. The plans 
offered by the former architect of the Park for the entrance gates not meet- 
ing the views of the Commissioners, it was decided to throw the matter open 
to general competition, and the designs of Mr. Hunt were adopted some two 
years since, after advertising for designs and receiving over twenty in competi- 
tion for the prizes offered. 

The plans offered by Mr. Vaux, the architect of the Park, contemplated 
2 



nothing more elaborate, we believe, than a single row of trees abont the 
entrances, protected by an iron railing ; and [)crhaps a gate-keeper's lodge 
on one side. This simplicity was in accordance witli what Mr. Vaux con- 
ceived to be essential to the preservation of the idea of rnral effect which 
the Central Park is designed to embody. 

Mr. Hunt's idea, whicli by adoption has l)econie the idea of the Park 
Commissioners, is, on the contrary, that it is impossible to fully carry out 
this jilan of rusticity. Wiiile conceding the im})ortance of interfering with 
nature as little as jjossible, it is to be remembered that the most faithful en- 
deavors in this direction will still, of necessity, leave the Park, what indeed 
it already is, a formal city pleasure-ground. We must, it needs be, so trim 
and restrain the wildness of nature that it can be called "" rural " in no 
absolute sense, but only by contrast with the bricks and stone surrounding it. 

And, when we have to provide for a population of some two millions or 
more, it will be impossible to preserve those narrow and winding walks at 
the entrance ways which form part of the plan for rural effect. It is folly, 
the Commissionei's think, to attemiit rural entrances for a park in the heart 
of a great city, surrounded by magnificent edifices of fashion, as our Central 
Park will soon be. Their idea, then, is that the entrances should be in 
keeping with the future external surroundings of the Park, and establish the 
connection between the street architecture without and cultivated nature 
within. It has been the purpose of the Commissioners, therefore, to secure 
designs which should leave nothing to be desired in the way of artistic effect. 
It was thought best to adopt at the start plans which, though they might 
require years for their entire com})letion, would give the right direction to 
effort, and ultimately secure for the principal entrances to the Central Park 
structures which would be every way worthy of flic magnificence of this 
great public improvement and of the metropolis to which it belongs; satisfy- 
ing the pride and educating the taste of our citizens. 

The problem presented to the architect has been a most ditTicult one; to 
blend nature and art together in harmony ; to secure the grand effect of a 
monumental ensemble while submitting to the practical necessity of leaving 
the entrance ways unobstructed, and to harmonize his designs with the sur- 
roundings of the Park, which are yet undetermined. How far he has sue- 



ceeded can be judged in some measure from an inspection of the designs 
which have secured the approbation of the Commissioners of the Park. 

The designs exhibited by Mr. Hunt are for the four entrances to the 
Park from the southerly side, on Fifty-ninth street— corner of Fifth avenue, 
opposite Sixth avenue, opposite Seventh avenue, and corner of Eighth 
avenue. The entrance at the corner of Fifth avenue it is proposed to call 
the Gate of Peace ; the one on the opposite side, at Eighth avenue, the War- 
rior's Gate : thus representing the two great divisions into which all human 
industry and eifort are divided — the arts of peace and the arts of war. 

The intermediate entrance at Sixth avenue it is proposed to call the Gate 
of Commerce, and that at the Seventh avenue, the Artists' Gate. The designs 
are of a monumental character, in keeping with these several designations. 

The entrance at Fifth avenue, the design for which is the most important 
of all, presents peculiar difficulties, as the elaborate architecture of the pro- 
spective Fifth avenue residences will tend to kill any effect sought by the 
artist. Looking north, two roads present themselves ; the continuation of 
the avenue on the one hand, and the entrance to the Park on the other. 
Naturally, the continuation of the avenue predominates, presenting, as it 
does, the always imposing feature of a continuous avenue. Had the entrance 
to the Park been laid out at an angle to Fifth avenue, instead of parallel to 
it, it would have appeared less secondary. This difficulty the architect has 
sought to overcofne by forming a spacious plaza at the corner of the Park, 
some four hundred feet square. This square will be bounded on the north by 
the entrance wajs, five in number. 

The triple road, with the broad walks flanking it, make an emcmble—a 
great improvement on the present disposition, one of the walks now turning 
off just before it arrives at the Park entrance, thereby detracting from the 
grandeur of the whole. The walks are also nearly doubled in width, a much 
needed improvement, they being now narrower than the sidewalks of our 
city avenues. The entire width of the entrance is to be two hundred feet, 
the five ways into which it is divided being distinctly marked by rows of 
elms. At the head of each row is placed a pedestal, serving as a gate-post. 
The principal of these separate the walks from the roadways, and the four 
secondary ones occupy the remaining places, thereby avoiding any monotony. 



It is ilcsigiuMl to siinnoniif (liese pedestals with .•i]iiin»priate groups, repre- 
senting the arts of peace. Thus naturally, the square, or entrance vestibule 
to the Park is bounded or framed in — on the east by the houses on Fifth 
avenue, on the south by those on Fifty-ninth street, and on the north by the 
entrance way. 

On the west, directly opposite Sixtieth street, it is proposed to erect a 
semicircular terrace, one hundred feet in diameter — a grand monumental 
feature which shall frame in this side of the square, without whicli it might 
appear lop-sided. In the middle of the terrace front, and directly in the 
axis of Sixtieth street, rises a shaft, some fifty feet in height, surmounted by 
the Indian and Sailor, supporting the Arras of New York. At the base is to be 
a spacious basin of water, containing figures representing the East and North 
rivers, with the figure of Hendrick Hudson between them on the bow of an 
anti(iue vessel ; the centre group thus symbolizing the discovery by Hendrick 
Hudson of Manhattan Island^ at the confluence of the North and East 
rivers. 

On either side of the ])asin, steps twenty feet in width will lead to the 
terrace, some five feet above the level of the entrance square. The circular 
jiart of the terrace projects over the bank, which slopes down to the lake 
just below ; a massive stone seat serving as a parapet wall. The effect of 
this bold feature is enhanced by cascades of water which descend on either 
side of the terrace to the lower level inside the Park; first into a grand basin 
and from this into the lake. At their points of convergence is a grand niche, 
thirty feet in diameter, to contain a group representing either Columbus 
or the Ocean. While this cascade will in itself form one of the most strik- 
ingly beautiful objects in the park, it is of great advantage for tlie relief it 
aflbrds to all that disagreeably sunken i»art of the Park situated between the 
Fifth and Sixth avenue entrances — a feature caused by the filling in of 
Fifty-ninth street and Fifth avenue, which are graded over twenty feet above 
the surface of the lake below. 

In the middle of the entrance square there is a space designed for pedes- 
trians. This feature is of absolute necessity, and though it might be re- 
freshing to the eye to see grass at this point, as at present, yet, as this place 
must be a refuge for the pedestrians crossing, necessarily it cannot be too 



ample for their accommodation. Here again is introdnced water, which 
always enlivens a place. Here, too, it has the great advantage of furnishing, 
as it were, this open space, which might appear too bare without the fountain 
in the centre, which forms a graceful feature, without hindering the view of 
the Park beyond; the latter a serious consideration, and one which has been 
carefully attended to. 

At the Eighth avenue the space in front of the entrance to the Park is 
to be enlarged to double the present size, and laid out in a square, with a 
fountain in the centre, as at the Fifth avenue entrance. In the middle of 
each of the two roads diverging from the entrance is placed a pedestal, to he 
surmounted by an equestrian statue of some military hero — this disposition 
of the pedestals dividing the stream of vehicles passing in and out of the 
Park. Flanking these roads are the walks for pedestrians, and between the 
two roads is a massive stone seat, in the shape of a quadrant, with parapet 
walls, with pedestals to be surmounted l)y military statues. 

The entrance at Sixth avenue is the width of the avenue. At the right 
and left, and directly opposite the entrance within the Park, are semicir- 
cular stone seats, bordering a small square or vestibule, from which spacious 
walks diverge. At the abutments of the seats are six pedestals, intended 
for statues of Trade, Navigation, etc. In the middle of each e.i:edm{semi- 
circular seat) rises a standard bearer. Rostral columns serve as gate-posts. 
The Seventh avenue entrance has a similar disposition of an open space 
inside the gate, with ezedrce to the right and left, from which radiate three 
walks. At the abutments of the exedne are pedestals supporting groups 
representing Painting and Sculpture, Music and Architecture. In the centre 
of the space rises a column supporting the Genius of the Arts. The gate- 
posts are Hermes. 

The A-arious designs for the several gates, it will be seen, are all of a 
monumental character, and have been so combined as to satisfy the great 
requisites of effect, breadth, height, and simplicity ; anything Hke meretri- 
cious ornament being studiously avoided. If they are carried out with be- 
coming taste and skill, we may look forward to having such a/«jwfe, if we 
may call it so, to our grand pleasure ground as no city in the world can 
boast of. There are few examples of such entrances abroad worthy of 



10 

examination, if we except the Bois de Boulogne, the entrance to which 
may properly be said to be the Arc de I'Etoile, at the head of the Champs 
Elys^es which marks the exit from the city into the l)road avenues leading 
into the Bois. 



III. 

A LETTER TO THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE CENTRAL PARK, 

PUBLISHED IN THE EVENING POST, MAECH 2, AND APRIL 5, 1866. 



To the Commissioners of the Central Park : 

Gentlemen : The writer of this communication, for himself, and on 
behalf of others, lovers of art, and residents and taxpayers of the city ot 
New York, begs leave respectfully to address you in regard to an important 
matter committed to your care — the gateways of the Central Park. 

It is, perhaps, unnecessary for citizens ever to apologize for expressing 
their opinions upon the management of great public trusts. There is cer- 
tainly no occasion for an apology in the present instance, because your 
Board, by its long delay in commencing to build the gateways, seems to 
invite suggestions from those who desire their completion. We, therefore, 
shall not hesitate to say frankly what we think on this subject, assuring 
you, meanwhile, that we feel a hearty admiration for what you have already 
done in the Park, and strong confidence in your prudent and patriotic action 
in the future. 

On the 26th of January, 1863, a member of your Board submitted cer- 
tain plans for the four gateways on Fifty-ninth street, which, after debate, 
were referred to the Committee on Statuary, Fountains, and Architectural 



12 

8tniclui'fs. to rciKnt tlicicon. This committee were also authorized to con- 
sult such architects in relation to the gateways as they might deem proper. 
Thev accordingly consulted Mr. Ridnud M. Hunt, who undertook to submit 
drawings himself, but also suggested that your Board should endeavor to 
procure others, and for that purpose should nllci- to give premiums for the 
best designs. This course was adopted, and during the summer ten designs 
were thus submitted. It nppears. however, that on the 2d of Heptember, 
1803, your Unard unanimously refused to adopt any of tliem. attirming the 
report of the sub-committee that none of them showed sufficient originality 
or fitness to the surrounding scenery to merit a premium. 

It fuithcr ap])ears that on the same day, the 2(1 of September, 186.3, 
vonr l)(i,ird unanimously approved, in their general features, of the designs 
for these four gates which Mr. Hunt had submitted, in obedience to the 
request of the Committee on Statuary, and authorized that committee " to 
eniplov Mr. Hunt, and to proceed with the erection of these gates, witii such 
modilication in their details as the committee might approve." 

Again, on tlie lUtli of A})ril. 1864. your Board unanimously resolved 
that the Comptroller of the Park should be directed "to i)roceed torthwith 
in the erection of the four gateway entrances in Fifty-ninth street, together 
with the several appurtenances, as e.xhibited in tlie adoi)ted sketches of Mr. 
Hunt, acfiirding to the resolutions of the Board, passed 2d September, in 
order tliat tliis portion of the work might be early completed." 

Atterwards, on the 2d of December, 1864. your Board unanimously 
rescdved tliat the subject of the chaiige of quality of material for constructing 
the gateways on Fifty-ninth street should be referred to the Committee on 
Statuary, etc., with power. 

We believe this was all the official action that took place in your Board 
on this subject down to a late period. It certainly seems to have been suf- 
ficient. Nothing could have been more explicit, direct, and comprehensive. 
But unfortunately not a single step was taken to carry it out. Not a spade- 
ful of earth was removed for that purpose. This inaction continued tor more 
than twenty months, until, finally, on the 11th day of Ma\', 18G-3, vour 
Bonrd expressly resolved that all work on the gateways of the Park should 
be deferred till its further order. So fiir as we are informed nothinsr what- 



ever has been done since in relation to this matter, and it thns appears that 
the whole subject, if not formally, has been Airtually dismissed from all 
further consideration. 

We-have examined Mr. Hunt's designs with considerable attention. We 
believe they are well adapted in their plans to the convenience of the in- 
creasing multitudes wlio will pass in and out of the Park in future years; and 
in their elevations, that they are beautiful and expressive, and in every way 
worthy of the places they ai'e intended to adorn. 

We beg leave, therefore, most respectfully to remonstrate against this 
delay in building them, and to request that your Board will proceed with 
the work at an early day, or kindly inform us why it has been thought best 
to postpone it indefinitely. 

We are well aware that the greatest caution should be used in deciding 
upon the forms of structures which are intended to be so permanent and so 
expensive as these. It is far better to be without gates than to erect those 
which we shall by and by regret to have adopted. But there should be a 
limit to this indecision. The Central Park now is in the condition of a pic- 
ture without a frame, and to postpone the completion of this crowning grace 
year after year, in this timid, hesitating way, is hardly worthy of those who 
have so far shown so much energy and enlightened public spirit in this un- 
dertaking. In the summer of 1865, attacks, which appear to have been care- 
fully concerted, were made upon Mr. Hunt's designs in several of the public 
prints. We do not know that your Board has been influenced by these criti- 
cisms. We have carefully read them, and they have not diminished in the 
least our approval of the general features of these plans. They may, how- 
ever, ha^•e had a contrary effect upon your minds. We beg leave, therefore, 
to offer what we conceive to be a sufficient answer to all of them — at any 
rate, to the chief objections they present. 

Excepting some criticisms ujjon details which we will notice hereafter, 
the main arguments against these designs are : — 

1st. That they are too monumental ; too elaborate and expensive for the 
places they are to occupy ; and 

2d. That they are too French. 
4 



14 



As to the first objertiou, your ]>o;iril shduld remember th;it in its previous 
action respecting the gateways, it suggested the employment of sculpture and 
symbolical decoration. Mr. Stebbins, in his learned and interesting report 
upon the nomenclature of the gates, which was accepted by your Board, con- 
stantly alludes to this auxiliary in making them attracti\'e. He indicates 
eertaiii industrial pursuits which may give their names to the gates, and 
wliicli may be of a character to '' readily admit of varied artistic treatment 
in the gateways themselves." He speaks of the " Foreigners' gate," which 
may in its " sculptural decoration directly acknowledge tlie obligation that 
the owners of the Park are under to liberal and disinterested men of other 
nations." 

It is true, he thinks, it can scarcely be considered within the proper scope 
(if the Commissioners to provide out of the Park funds artistic decorations of 
a really high character, at all the various entrances, but he nevertheless be- 
lieves '■ it is desirable to arrange the gateways with a view to possible elabo- 
ration hereafter," and that " an outlet may readily be left open for futin-e 
otfort in this direction by private subscription." 

^'our Board, also, in offering the rewards for designs and fixing your 
limits for the cost, stated that the " statuary represented need not be esti- 
mated " in this cost. You afterwards mentioned the names of the four gates 
which had been so ingeniously suggested by Mr. Stebl)ins. and then expressly 
said: "This nomencdature should, thei'efore, be illustrated in the designs, 
so far as each designer may consider it practicable or desirable." 

Mr. Hunt, therefore, in obedience to the expressed wislies of the Board, 
if for no other reason, could not have avoided the intruduction of sculpture 
and symbolism in his designs. 

But there was a motive for this, better than mere courtesy or a fulfil- 
ment of the conditions of an architectural problem. The gateways of the 
Central Park, on account of its position, and still more of its future use, 
should exhibit the highest resources of monumental art. They afford the 
opportunity which we have never so completely enjoyed before, and which 



15 

we should not now neglect, of summoning the best artistic genius to the 
]jublic service. Let us examine this matter with some attention. 

The Central Park is a regular parallelogram, half a mile wide and two 
miles and a half long. It is in the middle of the city, bounded on all sides 
by streets and avenues, which in a few years will be continuously enclosed 
by solid blocks of houses and filled with all the noise and bustle of metropoli- 
tan life. Opening into these avenues on the right and the left will be a hun- 
dred other streets, stretching off to the East and North Rivers, all compactly 
built and all crowded with thronging multitudes of people. 

When these streets shall be finished and the whole island covered thickly 
with houses, this park in its very centre will not appear so large as at present. 
The idea of size is relative. This open area which is now on the outskirts 
of the city, and seems so vast, will look very much smaller when the inhab- 
itants shall grow more familiar with its boundaries and with every nook and 
corner it contains. As it becomes apparently smaller, it will also become 
more artificial and less rural ; more of a garden and less of a park. Its ap- 
pearance is already shaped and colored by the art wliich is omnipresent in 
the curves of the roads, the opening of the vistas, the plantation of the shrub- 
beries, in the bridges, the archways, the casinos, the aviaries, the music halls, 
the fountains, the kiosks, and the terrace and its surroundings. To say 
even now that we forget art — that we fancy ourselves in the quiet solitudes 
of nature — is absurd. And in the future, when this shall be the resort of 
two millions of peoiile, when the roar of traffic through the transverse roads 
shall drown the singing of the birds— when the restaurants and summer 
houses, and music halls, and conservatories, and winter gardens and museums 
shall be greatly multiplied— when statues and busts, and monuments and 
columns shall crowd the avenues, the Central Park will become one great 
open air gallery of Art, instead of being, as some dreamers fancy it, a silent 
stretch of rural landscape caught up and inclosed within the raging tumult 
of a vast metropolis. 

" Un pezzo <Ji cielo caduto in terra." 

We know that this state of things is very different from the anticipations 
of our friends, the architects of the Park, and they will desire to postpone 



16 

it as long as possible ; but we nevertheless believe it to be unavoidable and 
inevitable, and that it will follow as a matter of course from the geographical 
position of the Park in tlic wvy centre of what will ])rol)ably become the 
largest city of the Christian world — a position entirely unlike that of other 
parks, which lie generally on the outskirts of the cities to which they belong. 

liut this ornate, architectural character which we believe the Central 
Park of the future must possess, on account of its location, will follow still 
more certainly from the mode in whith it was first established and is still 
maintained, and from the popular idea which prevails of its use. 

The Park is the pride and the delight of the people. There is no other 
spot which they regard with so nuich alTection and upon which they are 
willing to lavish so much treasure. It is not a mere fanciful notion, that as 
the sovereigns of Europe have their palaces and pleasm-e grounds, so this is 
the palace and the pleasure ground of our sovereign, the peojile. It is already 
the music hall of this potent monarch. Why should it not become his 
sculjjture gallery — the amjile treasury of the trojihies of his power? There 
is no other place which, by its extent, its general plan, and. above all, by the 
wise and intelligent manner in which it has generally been governed, atlords 
so excellent a fichl for tlie expression of great national ideas. Now, these 
great national ideas, the reverence for famous jioets, the admiration of heroic 
achievements, the triumphal progress of important reforms, the advancement 
of the nation in material power and the like, need to be expresseil by some- 
thing more significant and suggestive than landscape gardening — th;in trees 
and flowers and stretches of greensward. They demand the best creations of 
art, and particularly of plastic art. The erection of the colossal bust of 
Schiller and the proposed monument to Shakespeare, sliow the direction of 
the popular feeling in this matter — a direction whicli the Commissioners of 
the future will find it imi)0ssible to resist. How absurd, then, it is to cheat 
ourselves into the belief that this is always to be a sylvan retreat fit for 
shepherds and their flocks ? Not that we need sacrifice the charms of 
greensward, of spreading trees, of rocks and waterfalls, or exclude flowers 
and creeping vines. These may always exist, and be as lovely and enchanting 
as ever, but we must be content to see them united with the expressive 
forms of art, and intermixed with statues and monuments. We must not be 



17 

disappointed, also, if edifices for public recreation and instruction should be 
constantly added, like the Museum and Grallery of the Historical Society, 
for which several acres have already been appropriated. Winter gardens 
conservatories, music halls, and libraries must follow. Indeed, all that con- 
centration of the resources of intellectual and artistic pleasure which made 
the great public Therma? of Rome so attractive, may at some future day be 
found in the Park, in addition to all those delightful appliances which 
modern civilization has invented. 

For ourselves, we anticipate with satisfaction this probable future of the 
Park. We welcome the idea that it may become the field for the display of 
greater artistic triumphs than we have yet witnessed in America. It is 
sometimes the occasion, the happy conjunction of the necessity, with the 
ability to fulfil it, which quickens talents that would otherwise have lain 
dormant. The " Last Judgment " might never have been painted, if the 
vacant space over the altar of the Sistine Chapel had not summoned Buona- 
rotti to adorn it ; nor the Arabesques of Raphael, if the Loggie of the Vati- 
can had not required them. So the Central Park must call out in future the 
highest efforts of American genius. It is in plastic art that this has already 
made its best development, and here is the spot which of all others demands 
its exercise. There is little in our annals to paint. But in the great Amer- 
ican ideas there is every thing grand and noble to symbolize in sculpture. 
It is in marble and bronze that the magnificent thoughts which have created 
and preserved this country must have their only adequate visible expression. 
But it will not be in the filthy streets, in the neglected squares, in the dilap- 
idated market places, in the halls of public edifices, the building of which 
has been farmed out by peculating officials, and which will stand (so Ions' as 
the frauds in their construction will permit) shameful monuments of execra- 
ble taste as well as of official corruption ; it will not be in these unfit recep- 
tacles that the emblems of whatever is noble and pure and majestic in the 
character and history of the American people shall be erected. True artists 
will revolt from the task of associating their fine productions with all which 
is imbecile and dishonorable in the conduct of municipal affairs. But in the 
Central Park, which your honest and intelligent administration has made the 

brightest, the most beautiful, the most complete of all the city possessions, 
5 



18 

the Cor Cordiiim of the metropolis, the spot where the pride and the h)ve of 
the people are concentrated, there will the most exalted genius delight to 
have its creations exhibited, and there will private wealth be cheerfully ex- 
pended in bountiful profusion, to place them worthily before the public eye. 

We have endeavored to paint this picture of the Central Park of the future 
in order to ask what should be its framework, what should characterize its 
entrances — those portions of it which mark its boundaries, and shut it in 
from the world around it. It seems to us that it would be unfit to creep 
into such a place as this through a sort of accidental opening — like a wheel 
track worn out in the corner of a country training ground — a postern in a 
mean fence ; a few plain pillars with swinging gates, opening into narrow 
paths. Surely, ca ery one who reflects uiion the character of this place 
must say, that the entrances to it should be majestic and monumental and 
endowed with all the grandeur that architecture and sculpture can bestow. 
If the palace is to be stately and full of every thing to delight the eye, to 
please the fancy, to elevate the imagination, to arouse the patriotism, so 
should the front of the palace, the doors which 02)en upon its glories, be corre- 
spondingly magnificent. 

We Ir.iYd dwelt with more earnestness ui)on tlie propriety, we may almost 
say the necessity, of introducing monumental art into the Park, because, in 
the Report of your Board for the year I860, you express a widely different 
opinion. "Vegetation," you say, " should hold the first place of distinction." 
* '■" * ''' " It is the work of nature, invulnerable to criticism, accepted 
by all, as well the cultivated as the ignorant, and affords a limitless field for 
interesting observation and instruction." ''' * * * '' There is not only 
fitness in this idea, but there is safety. All art work is the subject of 
animadversion ; much of it sinks beneath observation ; it is the fortune of 
very little of it to escape wide censure; less of it finds permanent accept- 
ance." Will you pardon us if we say that we do not remember to have ever 
seen before the fear of criticism .put forward as a reason for not employing 
the resources of art ? You will not use sculi)ture, because it may be the 
'• subject of animadversion." Statues are to be avoided, because it will be 
" safer " to plant trees. Artists are to be neglected, because their works 
may be exposed to the " wide censure " of some penny-a-liner. It seems to 



19 

us there are many things worse than tlie buzzing of the mosquitoes of the 
public journals, and one of them is the consciousness of having been fright- 
ened by trifles from the performance of important duties. 

We have thus far attempted to defend Mr. Hunt's designs by showing 
that they are not too elaborate and monumental for the Central Park as we 
conceive it will be in the future. It is likely, however, that this imaginary 
picture of ours will be pronounced by many to be chimerical and extravagant. 
To all such persons we beg to say that even if we are in error on this point, 
and if the Park is always to remain in its present comparatively rural con- 
dition, we shoiUd still consider these designs to be extremely elegant and 
appropriate, and this for several reasons, but particularly on account of the 
greater convenience of their ground plans and the better adaptation of their 
elevations to the street architecture which will surround the Park, provided 
this architecture is to be of the character which the location demands. 

It is a great pity that Mr. Hunt did not exhibit the ground plans of these 
gates as well as the perspective views at the Academy last summer. They 
would not have prevented the attacks of selfish and interested critics, but 
they might perhaps have induced more honest and intelligent observers to 
suspend their unfavorable opinions. It is only necessary to see the openings 
proposed by Mr. Hunt traced over those in the original designs, to be con- 
vinced of the immense superiority of the former, in all points of convenience 
and beauty. They are much more spacious and imposing, they provide more 
completely for the proper division of the incoming and outgoing crowds, and 
they display to better advantage the charming features of the scenery within. 
The Eighth avenue opening, in particular, seems to us such a vast improve- 
ment over the first arrangement, which is meagre in outline and narrow at 
the very point where it should be wide, that we wonder why your Board can 
hesitate a moment in adopting it. And as to the Sixth and Seventh avenue 
approaches, it is surprising that the diminutive paths which appear, upon the 
maps of the Park, to have been laid out for the throngs of visitors at those 
points, should find the least favor in comparison with Mr. Hunt's larger and 
more beautiful plans. 

It has been made an objection to the changes he proposes here and at the 
other entrances, that they will require alterations of the ground, both expen- 



20 

sive and injurious to the natural beauties of the neighborhood. We believe 
that in every in&tance the advantage gained will more than compensate for 
any possible loss in this way. Mr. Vaux declares that the terrace at the 
Fifth avenue gate will break up the repose of the scenery around the small 
hike in that angle of the Park. But even if this be true, that region is too 
limited in extent and quite too near the boundary line for the Commissioners 
to attempt to preserve its present features by the sacrifice of other more iin- 
]iortant advantages. That instantaneous transition from city streets to a 
poor imitation of the wildness of nature which some persons admire iu this 
spot, seems to us to be forced and even disi)leasing. It would be better if 
the deception could be )nade tolerably complete. But, while the eye is 
cheated by the rocks and the water, the ear detects in the rattling of the car- 
riages the proximity of a tumultuous crowd, so that the illusion is destroyed, 
and we are struck with the aifectation and pretence of the whole affair. 

We repeat the statement, that a careful study of Mr. Hunt's ground plans 
will convince any one of their superiority to the others, even if they should 
require some alteration of the territory as it is laid out at present. And if 
we approve of the ground plans, we must also approve of the distribution 
of the masses which they generate. Now, this distribution of the masses is 
the most important jiart of the elevations. So that, if you reject the orna- 
ments altogether, this arrangement of the principal forms will still remain 
extremely complete and satisfactory. 

And as to the ornaments which Mr. Hunt proposes — -the statues, the 
Hermes, the rostra, the colunurs, and other things — we cannot help believing 
that the great majority of the citizens will regard them as very noble and 
proper additions whenever the streets around the Park shall be finished in a 
manner which their position and the rank of New York as the greatest city 
of the western hemisphere demand. We beg to insist particularly upon this 
point. We think it is certain that whatever seems too elaborate and arti- 
ficial in these designs will disappear when we reject the standard by which 
we are apt to measure such things in this country, and judge of them by 
comparison with similar objects in great European capitals. W New York is 
ever to resemble a metropolis, if it is ever to be any thing but an overgrown 
provincial town — an unmeaning, dreary waste of brick and brown-stone fronts 



21 

— it must have some marked architectural centre — some spot which shall be 
distinguished from all others by its vast open spaces, its long perspectives, 
its symmetrical masses of building, its imposing monuments, its richly elabo- 
rated /«f</^€S. Now, the streets and avenues around the Central Park afford 
the ])est opportunity we have for giving this raietropolitan splendor to our 
city ; but, to attain this character, they must be laid out upon a scale and 
finished in a style more imposing than any thing we have yet attempted. We 
must discard the City Hall a:id the grounds about it as our standards of 
magnificence, and indulge ourselves in a breadth of space and a height and 
dignity of architectui-al composition which may appear absurd and extrav- 
agant to uncultivated eyes. 

It is perhaps too much to expect that New York will ever present a region 
of such artistic grandeur as Paris shows between the Louvre and the Barriere 
de I'Etoile. We cannot hope to exhibit a fagade upon our Park like that of 
the Tuileries, which extends along its garden front more than one thousand 
feet, nor a grou}) of buildings like the Louvre, which, including the Tuileries, 
contains nearly thirty acres of ground, covered with the most imposing and 
richly decorated structures, and embraces the noble Place du Carousel, which 
has an area of nearly a million and a half of square feet. Even the small 
open court of the Louvre contains more square feet than the whole space 
lately appropriated by your Board to the Historical Society. We may despair 
of rivalling the Place de la Concorde, the centre of the finest city perspective 
in the world, and which it is hardly probable that Rome, in her best days, 
excelled. But if we are to make the slightest approach to all this splendor, 
if the outer boundary of the Park is to be a spot of marked architectural 
displays in its fagades, its perspectives, and its monuments, and to equal in 
this respect not Paris, but some third or fourth rate P]uropean town, the 
artistic elaborateness of Mr. Hunt's designs is the very last quality in them 
to which we should object as a fault. 
6 



22 



II. 



We need sav l)ut little in answer to the second general oly'ection to these 
plans : that they are too French. 

The idea that they are French seems to have arisen, first, from the foct 
that Mr. Hnnt, although he is an American, studied his profession in France ; 
and, secondly, because in borrowing certain forms of sculpture as temporary 
ornaments for his architecture, he happens to place the famous horses of 
Coustou on the pedestals of the Fifth avenue entrance, and to adopt for the 
Seventh avenue entrance the Hermes which Jean Goujon had already used 
at Fontainebleau. 

Now, this is as unreasonable as to call Messrs. Vaux and Mould's designs 
English, because these gentlemen are Englishmen and studied their pi'ofession 
in England ; and as to tlie horses and the busts, we must remember that 
Mr. Hunt is not a sculptor ; he is an architect. He did not pretend to in- 
vent these designs for statuary. His selection was purely arbitrary. It 
might have been one thing as well as another, provided the statues harmonized 
with his masses. These designs were intended to exhibit general architectural 
effects and not ornamental sculpture, and it is for the former and not the 
latter that he is to be criticised and held i-esponsible. 

But if these plans l>e French in tlieir character, why is this to l)e con- 
sidered a reproach ? Is there a country in the world where art occupies so 
high a position at this day as it does in France ? Is there any modern archi- 
tecture so much admired and so much copied as the French ? We see it 
reproduced constantly in England. If we may presume to express our 
own opinion about it, we should say tliat it unites in an admirable degree 
elegance of forms with a nice adaptation to tlie requirements of modern civili- 
zation. At any rate, it seems somewhat presumptuous for a critic whose 
studies have, perhaps, hardly extended beyond the new City Hall and the 
store fronts of Broadway, to characterize those noble works which embellish 
the Paris of our day, and which are the productions of men whose distin- 
guished talent and conscientious devotion to their art are the admiration of 
all Europe, as the "barren spawn of French Im})erialism" and "Louis Napo- 



23 

leon's favorite sop thrown to the dragon of the Parisian ouvrerier The 
writer to whom we allude seems to appeal to the popular feeling against the 
invader of Mexico to swell the blasts of indignation which he tries to raise 
against Mr. Hunt's gates. " We don't like," he says, " to be reminded of the 
existence of such riff-raff as the French Emperor when we are in our Park." 
•' It would be an affliction to us," he adds, '• that we couldn't enter our gar- 
den without being obliged to pass through gates which recall the cruelty and 
injustice of systems that Jupiter Scapin and his mates sustain and delight in." 
Mr. Hunt little thought, when he made these designs, that he was about 
to add fuel to the flames of an international controversy. But seriously, all 
this is extravagant and puerile, and the author of it must confess, upon re- 
flection, that this idea of connecting architecure with the vices of certain 
political systems is most shadowy and unsubstantial. It is a matter of no 
sort of consequence whether Mr. Hunt's plans are French in their character 
or nut. provided they are elegant and appropriate to the purposes for which 
they were made. 



III. 

The objections to the details of these gates refer chiefly to the architectu- 
ral ornament, which cannot be fairly criticised without a study of the finished 
drawings, or to the sculptured decorations, which, not having been invented 
by Mr. Hunt, and only selected by him as being adapted to the masses of 
his design, should not be made a subject of animadversion. A writer in a 
weekly journal, who is more courteous and intelligent than some of his 
brethren, admits the whole case when he says that " Mr. Hunt has almost 
perfectly well conceived his subject ; it is evident he has grasped the whole 
matter in hand and can handle it." This critic objects to the Ionic of the 
capitals of the Eighth avenue gate-posts and to the use of the Doric cornice 
at the Fifth and Seventh avenues. These are points upon which connoisseurs 
may fairly differ. We do not believe that the best educated among them 
would make these objections after an examination of the finished drawings 
on a larger scale : but if they should do so, it would by no means afford a 
reason for what seems to be an indefinite postponement of their execution. 



24 

"We confess that we are not perfectly satisfied ourselves with tlie use of a 
detached (•(ihiiiin to support a statue era coat-of-anns carved '• in tlio round." 
But, when we remember the problem the artist had to solve, we are disposed 
to be indulgent to liim in this matter. It was necessary in all these gates 
to give height and dignity to a composition which required wide, vacant 
spaces and a thin, drawn-out system of posts and delicate iron work. In 
order to emphasize these entrances, to give them impressiveness and signifi- 
cance, and to take away from the low, flat appearance of long gates swinging 
between a succession of posts, it was desirable to carry the eye upward. Hence 
the use of these columns and the tall masts l)earing flags and gonfalons. As 
marking boundaries, as indicating important points in the outer inclosure of 
the Park to be conspicuous at a distance, these columns seem to be unobjec- 
tionable. They are complete and independent olyects, beautiful in themselves, 
and may as well be used for such a purpose as arches, which are also frequently 
detached from fac^udes and set up to do duty in isolated positions. Any one 
who remembers the two columns of the Barriere du Trone in Paris, standing 
each by itself and bearing a statue, will confess that, however incorrect they 
may appear to fastidious critics, they are certainly very majestic in their 
general effect. 

We cannot agree with the writer whom we have quoted, in considering 
the terrace of the Fifth avenue entrance an accessory of no value, and being 
not only useless and badly designed, but positively injurious. We tliink, on 
the contrary, it gives importance and dignity to the gateway, and it would 
be worth all the money it would cost. This spot — the south-eastern angle 
of the Park — wUl probably be for many years to come the most attractive 
and distinguished architectural point on the island, and it should be marked 
by a liberal display of embellishment and by a breadth and majesty of treat- 
ment beyond all others. Mr. Hunt has accordingly concentrated here all 
the resources of his art — ample space, imposing masses of mason work, 
colossal sculpture, graceful fountains, and picturesque vistas, and he has suc- 
ceeded in producing an ensemble which, while it is infinitely more convenient 
in the plan than the original design for this entrance, is peculiarly striking 
and satisfactory to the eye. 

We may say, generally, in answer to objections to some of the architec- 



25 

tural details of these compositions, both those to which we have alluded and 
others, that if, upon further study and the criticism of competent judges, 
they should seem to require alterations, we feel sure that no false pride 
would prevent Mr. Hunt from making them. But after all, considering his 
education and position as an architect, he is quite as likely to be right as his 
critics, and we may well leave these smaller matters in his hands. 

We have stated our opinion of the unfairness of attacking the suggestions 
for statuary which Mr. Hunt introduced to complete the masses of his com- 
positions. All the small wit which some writers have condescended to use 
about his heathen symbolism seems as pointless as it is unjust. Mr. Hunt 
has no intention of adopting these statues, or of designing himself any others 
in their places. We have masters in this department of art, to whom he is 
willing to intrust this work. We fancy that Powers or Brown, or Palmer 
or Ward, or Launt Thompson or Rodgers, or Miss Stebbins, could furnish 
sculpture which the boldest of these critics would hesitate to ridicule. We 
feel sure that the " Indian Hunter," for instance, could find no more appro- 
priate resting place than at one of these gateways, and the prospect of such 
a destination for it, if it could be assured, would seem almost to settle the 
question as to the practicability of raising a sufficient sum to cast it in bronze, 
and thus preserve it forever as one of the noblest ornaments of the city. 

We have already alluded to the writer in a daily journal, who hates the 
French so bitterly. He attacks these designs with an undiscriminating 
ferocity, which characterizes much of the art criticism in that particular 
newspaper. He writes cleverly, and seems to have learned some of the 
" ingenuas arks'' of which Ovid speaks, but the study of them has not pro- 
duced upon his manners the influence that the poet ascribes to it : 

/ "Emollit mores, nee sinit esse feros." 

He says of these drawings that he " never heard any one approve them ;" 
that they "are both ugly and unsuitable;" that "they break the law of use 
and beauty ;" that " they are as un-American as it is possible to make them ;" 
that " they are tame and spiritless copies of modern French work ;" that 
" nothing springs out of the needs of the place, nor is dictated by conditions 

that exist and ought to be respected, but every thing is intense, artificial, and 

7 



26 

formal ;" that they exhibit " no freedom," " no play ;" that they are •' all show? 
and expensive show ;" " the minimum of beauty for the maximum of money ;" 
that they are " ugly," " unmeaning," and " unnecessary ;" that " to get them 
we have to throw away in each case some marked peculiarity of the ground, 
some natural condition which has been well turned to account" by Messrs. 
Vaux and Olmsted ; that " Mr. Hunt tries to wipe out Nature, to substitute 
symmetry for her irregularity, to give us stones for bread." '" We have 
lightly touched," the writer says, " upon the unreason of these designs ; their 
ugliness, their utter weakness, would take us too long to consider," and much 
more in the same strain. 

" Brave words," as Flucllen says ; " brave words," but nothing else. 
Something more than an indictment is required before a man can be con- 
victed. Here is the indictment. We traverse it in every count. It has 
not been proved. Until it shall be proved, it is worth no more than our 
denial. 

This critic, however, had another duty to perform besides attacking 
Mr. Hunt's designs ; he had at the same time to sustain those of Mr. Vaux 
and Mr. Mould, and to reconcile the grounds of his praise and his blame in the 
two cases, lie has not done this in a very skilful manner. We beg you to 
understand that we do not intend to find fault with what either Mr. Vaux 
or Mr. Mould has executed in the Park. These gentleman have con- 
tributed several fine things to the grounds, and the latter especially has a 
charming idea of the use of color in architecture. We only wish to show how 
difficult it was for our pugnacious friend to make the principles upon which 
he praised the English artists square with those upon which he attempted 
to demolish the American. He is a great admirer of nature, as we all are, 
and contends that we should have no more architecture in the Park than is 
absolutely necessary. His first difficulty is to reconcile this with Mr. Vaux's 
archways, which we know are very elaborate and expensive, and intended, 
of course, to be seen and admired for all time to come. He disposes of 
these, however, at a mouthful. He says that " every year's growth shuts 
the archways more and more out of sight ;" that " before a great while the 
existence of most of them will hardly be suspected ! " Every child must 
see the absurdity of this assertion ; and even if it were true, how ridiculous 



27 

it was to waste so much time and labor upon beautiful structures which 
ought to be hidden as soon as j^ossible ! 

After the archways "are taken out of the scene," says our critic, 
" there is left of the architecture only the terrace," and this was erected " in 
obedience to the law that makes a centre, to which all drives, walks, and 
rambles tend, absolutely necessary." Mr. Vaux, he says, would have 
preferred a " mountain, or at least a hill, or even a great mass of rock ;" 
but Nature had not given it and it could not be supplied, so he put the 
terrace there. 

We believe a very respectable " mountain, or at least a hill, or a great 
mass of rock," could have been constructed for much less than the cost of 
the Terrace ; but Mr. Vaux was quite too good an artist to think of any 
such thing. He wanted as much art as he knew how to make, and so he 
designed the terrace. But, having once gotten the terrace, our critic does 
not seem to look upon it any longer as a pis aller — as only a substitute for a 
" mountain," &c. He pronounces it most beautiful, and then brings out 
another objection to Mr. Hunt's gates, that they " detract from the importance 
of the great central feature ;" " that it is a mistake to make subordinate 
features equal or superior to the central one." How this can be true, if the 
gates are as ugly and weak as he asserts, we cannot understand ; and if they 
are beautiful and appropriate, as we say they are, the fact that they may 
thereby injure the effect of Mr. Vaux's terrace is not a good reason for dis- 
carding them. The better plan would be to improve Mr. Vaux's terrace. 
But we have no desire to pursue any further the inconsistencies of this 
critic. 



IV. 

We have attempted in this letter to show that the beauty of the Park, the 
architectural completeness of the city, and the convenience of the people, 
would all be greatly promoted by the erection of these gateways, which 
your Board two years and a half ago unanimously decided to undertake. You 
have ever since neglected to commence this work, and at last voted to post- 



28 

})()iK' it by a fonnal resolution, which, when taken in connection with your 
long inaction, seems to aiaouut to a virtual abandonment of the whole affair. 
Will you pardon us Ibr saying that we think it is due to Mr. Hunt's pro- 
fessional position that you should i-econsider this resolution ? Whatever 
may be the faults or the merits of his designs, he deserves to be treated 
courteously and justly, and, since they have been once adopted, to know at 
least whether they are ever to be carried out, and, if not, for what reason 
they have been discarded. He is neither a child nor a charlatan, and has as 
good claims as any one to seek for the honor of erecting these gateways. It 
is true, he is an American, wiiich seems sometimes in a competition for artis- 
tic laurels to be a liinderancc rather than an advantage. But we feel sure 
that in your eyes both his birthplace and his well-known loyalty will give 
him an additional claim on your regard. It is particularly to his professional 
antecedents, however, that we beg to call your attention. Let us state these 
very briefly. lie commenced the study of architecture in 1844, twenty-two 
years ago, with M. Darier, at Geneva, in Switzerland. In 1845, he entered 
at Paris the atelier of M. Hector Lefuel, who is now the architect of the 
Emperor. He continued with him as a pupil for nearly ten years, pursuing at 
the same time his studies in the Ecole des Beaux Arts. In 1853, he employed 
a vacation in making a careful professional tour througli Germany, Italy, 
Egypt, Syria, and Greece, having already visited Germany once and Italy 
twice before. In 1854, M. Lefuel being engaged upon that great work which 
is the crowning architectural triumph of the reign of the present Emperor — 
the completion of tlie connection between the Louvre and the Tuilerie.s — 
Mr. Hunt, who had become one of his favorite and most valued pupils, entered 
the Bureau des Etudes of that magnificent undertaking. He was employed 
there constantly in the most important and instructive labors upon various 
parts of the work, but had special charge of the pavilion, called the Pavilion 
de la Bibliothe(|uo. ojiposite to the Palais Royal, for which, under the super- 
vision of M. Lefuel, he made the original sketch and the working drawings. 
This design was afterwards executed, and the fcK^ade now exists — a conspicu- 
ous monument not only of Mr. Hunt's talent, but of M. Lefuel's confidence 
in his ability. He also made the designs and working drawings for the dormer 
windows of that part of tlie palace fronting on the Rue de Rivoli. In the 



29 

autumn of 1855 he returned to America, and in 1857 became the assistant to 
Mr. Thomas U. Walter, the architect of the Capitol at Washington. For 
several years past he has resided in New York, and has designed buildings 
for tliis city, for Boston, and other places, which have been deservedly admired. 
He has just completed the sketch for the new museum and galleries of the 
Historical Society, which has met with the approval of the Building Com- 
mittee of that institution. 

It seems necessary to explain Mr. Hunt s professional position to show 
that on this account, if for no other, he should be treated fairly and justly, 
and not dismissed from the charge of erecting these gates witliout full oppor- 
tunity for discussion and explanation. 

We beg to submit these remarks to your careful consideration, and to ask 
such action in tiie premises as the interests of the pul)lic, the honor of your 
Board, and the claims of Mr. Hunt mav rc(juire. 

CIVIS. 

8 



IV. 

PROCEEDINGS 



OF THE 



BOARD OF C0M3IISSI0XEPiS OF THE CENTRAL PARK, 

RELATING TO THE EXTRANCES OX FIFTY-XIXTH STREET. 



Jnhj 12th, 1860. — Resolved, That the Architect-in-Chief be requested to 
furnish designs for an inclosure along the southerly side of the Park, provid- 
ing in the line of said inclosure for entrances with appropriate ornamentation 
at both Sixth and Seventh avenues, and that in said designs enti'ances be 
adapted to the use of pedestrians, and so adjusted as to admit carriages, 
should the proper interior arrangements hereafter be provided therefor, with 
the estimated cost, and that at the same time he present designs for the pro- 
posed entrances at the Fifth and Eighth avenues. 

November 23 J, 1860. — Mr. Green submitted designs for iron gateways, 
and stone wall or fence for inclosing the Park. 

Debate was had thereon, when 

On motion of Mr. Green, the whole subject was referred to the Commit- 
tee on Statuary, Fountains, and Architectural Structures. 



32 

March 2dt/i, 18G1. — A further communication was received from tlic 
Architect-inChief and Superintendent, relative to, and transmitting designs 
f(ir fencing and inclosing the Park. 

Oil motion of Mr. Belmont, said communication was referred to the Spe- 
cial Committee appointed this day (Messrs. Stebhins, Russell, and Belmont). 

Januari/ 2(jfh, 1863. — Mr. Green submitted several plans of gateway en- 
trances to the Park on Fifty-ninth street. 

Debate was had thereon, when 

Mr. Hutchins moved that said plans be referred to the Committee on 
Statuary, Fountains, and Architectural Structures, to report further thereon, 
and that said Committee have power to consult sucli architects in relation 
thereto, as they may deem jiroper. 

The question being put on the adoption of said motion, it was determined 
in the afiirmative as follows : 

A//CS — Messrs. Russell, Hutchins, Green, Stebbins, Grinnell — 5. 

Mof/ Uih, 1SG3. — Resignations of Mes.srs. Olmsted and Vaux accepted 
by the Board. 

By unanimous consent, 

Mr. Russell, from the Committee on Statuary, Fountains, and Architect- 
ural Structures, to which was referred several plans of Gateway Entrances 
to the Park on Fifty-ninth street, to report further thereon, and to consult 
such architects in relation thereto, as they might deem proper, reported ver- 
bally that said committee had made some progress therein, and would report 
upon said subject at a future meeting of the Board. 

SPECIFICATION FOR DESIGNS OF GATES AND GATEWAYS. 

Office of the Board of Commissioners of the Central Park. 

June nth, ISCiS. 

Designs are to be drawn to a scale of a quarter of an inch to a foot, and 
may be in colors or in neutral tint. 

No expenditure for the four gates and their appurtenances exceeding 
$50,000 is contemplated. 

Persons offering designs will send with them an estimate of the cost of 



06 

constructing the respective gates and gateways, which should not exceed this 
sum ; economy in construction will be an important element in the selection 
of a design, and in awarding the premium. 

Places for Statuary should be shown in the designs, but the Statuary 
represented need not be estimated in the above cost. 

Following a general plan of nomenclature of the Park entrances, the fol- 
lowing names are suggested for these gates respectively : — 

That at Fifth avenue and Fifty-ninth street, The Scholars' Gate. 
That at Sixth " " The Artists' Gate. 

That at Seventh " " The Aktisans' Gate. 

That at Ei^htli " " The Merchants' Gate. 

This nomenclature shoulil therefore be illustrated in the designs, so far as 
each designer may consider it practicable or desirable. 

Without committing itself to this course, the intention of the Board is, in 
case either design is adopted, to engage the services of the Architect, sub- 
mitting the design, to carry it out in construction, at the usual professional 
compensation ; if this course is adopted, the premium will be awarded to the 
set of designs that the Board shall determine to be the second best, other- 
wise the premium will be awarded to the set of designs which the Board 
determine best entitled thereto. 

The series of designs to which the premium is awarded will become the 
property of the Board. 

August loth, 1863. — On motion of Mr. Russell, the Board proceeded to 
open the plans and sketches for four southerly gates and gateways of the 
Central Park, submitted for competition, which were numbered. 

Debate was had on them, when. 

On motion of Mr. Green, said plans and sketches were referred to the 
Committee on -Statuary, Fountains, and Architectural -Structures, to report 
thereon to the Board, or to the Executive Committee of the Board. 

September 2d, 1863. — Mr. Russell, from the Committee on Statuary, 

Fountains, and Architectural Structures, to whom was referred the plans and 

sketches for four southerly gates and gateways of the Park, at the last 

meeting of the Board, to report thereon, presented a report in writing. 
9 



34 

Mr. Russell moved that said report be adopted, and entered at length 
upon the minutes. 

The question being put on the adoption of said motion, it was determined 
in the affirmative, as follows : 

^l^cs— Messrs. Russell, Butterworth, Green, Blatchford, Grinnell— 5. 

To THE Board of Commissionkks of the Central Park: 

The Committee on Statuary, Fountains, and Arehitectural Structures 
report, tluit tliey have examined the plans referred to them, marked Nos. 1 
to 10. and while they find a variety of designs, it does not appear to them 
that either of the i)lans offered comprehends a sufficient degree of originality 
and fitness to the surrounding features of the landscape to justify the Com- 
mittee in recommending the Board to award the premium proposed to its 
author, nor would the Committee recommend the erection of either of the 
gateways shown in the design ottered. 

As the question may arise as to the disposition of the premium offered, 
the Committee recommend that the Treasurer be authorized to distribute 
among the competitors such portions of the premium as he may deem judicious. 

Dated New York, Septeiiiher 'It!, 18(13. 

C. n. RUSSELL, j Committee on Statuary, 

J. F. BUTTERWORTH, I Fountains, and Archi- 
ANDREW II. GREEN, J tcctural Structures. 

Mr. Butterworth offered the following : 

Resolved, That the sketches of the four gateways on the southerly boun- 
dary of the Park, submitted by Mr. Hunt, be and the same are hereby ap- 
proved in their general features, and that the Committee on Statuary, Foun- 
tains, and Architectural Structures, be authorized to employ the designer of 
said sketches, and to proceed with the erection of these gates, with such 
modifications in their details as said Committee may approve. 

The question being put on the adoption of said resolution, it was deter- 
minc(l in the affirmative, as follows : 

Ayes — Messrs. Russell, Butterworth. Green, Blatchford, and Grinnell — 5. 

Xovember 12///. ISGo. — Mr. Green offered the following resolution: 



35 



Resolved, That no gateways be constructed or erected on the Fifth or 
Eighth Avenues until they have been referred to the Committee on Statuary 
Fountains, and Architectural Structures, and reported on by said Committee 
to the Board for their action. 

Debate was had thereon, when 

The question being put on the adoption of said resolution, it was deter- 
mined in the negative, as follows : 

Ayes — Messrs. Russell, Hutching, Green, Stebbins — i. 

i\%— Mr. Fields— 1. 

Ajml 19th, 1864. — Mr. Russell offered the following : 

Resolved, That the Comptroller of the Park be directed to proceed forth- 
with in the erection of the four gateway entrances in Fifty-ninth street, 
and southerly boundary of the Park, together with the several appurtenances, 
as exhibited in the adopted sketches of Mr. Hunt, according to the resolution 
of this Board, passed 2d September last, in order that this portion of the 
work may be early completed. 

The question being put on the adoption of said resolution, it was deter- 
mined in the affirmative, as follows : 

Ayes — Messrs. Russell, Hutchins, Green, Blatchford, and Grinnell — 5. 

31(11/ Wth, 1865. — On motion of Mr. Fields, 

Resolved, That all work on the gateways of the Park be deferred till the 
further order of the Board. 

Ayes — Butterworth, Hutchins, Field, Green, Blatchford — 5. 
Kays — Russell — 1. 



In reference to this delay, the following communication was addressed 
to the Commissioners : 

New York, December \Sth, 1805. 

To the Commissioners of the Central Park : 

Gentlemen: — Several mouths since, your Honorable Board passed 
a resolution, accepting the plans for the Central Park Gates which I had 



36 

the honor, at the request of some of your number, to submit for examina- 
tion ; subsequently, by another vote, further action ou this resohition was 
indefinitely deferred. 

Under these circumstances, I respectfully ask you to inform me if 
the delay tlius agreed to, is owing to any proposed modification of the 
details of my designs, or is to be attributed to [)rudential motives in ref- 
erence to the expense ; if the former, I am ready and desirous to confer 
at an early day with your Board, or with the Committee in whose hands 
the matter was placed ; and if the latter, it would greatly accommodate 
me to know the probable time when the work authorized by your Board 
can be auspiciously commenced. 

Ail of which is respectfully submitted by 

Your obedient servant, 

RICHARD M. HUNT. 



